Search

To maintain its maritime advantage, the Navy must select and develop effective leaders. Organizations widely use information on personality traits of employees to help identify and develop leaders. In this thesis, I investigate whether extroverts are more likely to become leaders, and whether extroverts make better leaders. I use data on U.S. Naval Academy midshipmen who complete the Myer Briggs Test Indicator (MBTI) for personality type awareness. In their senior year, midshipmen have opportunities to be selected for leadership positions in the Brigade. Using data on senior midshipmen who graduated from USNA between 2005 and 2010, I estimate multivariate models to analyze the impact of extroversion on (a) selection for a leadership position and (b) leadership performance. The results show some evidence that extroverts might have a higher probability of selection for key battalion leadership positions, but not at the company leader level or below. The estimates find no difference in leader performance between introverts and extroverts, as measured by peer and senior officer evaluations. Some limitations of this analysis relate to the data: the MBTI might not be the best instrument for measuring extroversion, and the leader performance measures may be "noisy" indicators of true performance. Using the Big 5 personality test recently adopted by USNA, future research could add more insight into the impact of personality on leadership selection and performance.

This thesis develops surveys using Likert scales and open-ended questions to measure inclusive behaviors in the Navy. We compared responses across gender and racial/ethnic groups as well as between sailors stationed on the East Coast vs. the West Coast. The survey we created can be used to assess inclusive and exclusive behaviors in the fleet. We examined what inclusion and exclusion behaviors look like among sailors and showed which inclusion and diversity (I&D) competencies, when demonstrated correctly, are most impactful for building an inclusive environment. Our research also shows which command practices and policies contribute to greater acceptance for inclusion. Based on our results, our research shows that underrepresented racial/ethnic groups and females feel less included overall. We then validated that East Coast sailors feel less included compared to West Coast sailors. Based on our findings, we recommend more general military training and utilizing pilot programs to improve emotional intelligence throughout the military. We also recommend distributing the survey throughout the Navy to gain a more complete understanding of diversity and inclusion in the fleet. We believe these findings will improve Navy leadership and help minimize exclusion based on racial, gender, and minority status, thus enhancing our military’s strength., Lieutenant, United States Navy, Lieutenant, United States Navy, Approved for public release. distribution is unlimited

The Fleet Scholars Education Program (FSEP), established in 2015, rewards top performers within the unrestricted line (URL) and Information Warfare (IW) communities with fully funded graduate education for up to two years at a civilian institution. For this MBA project, the author conducted a survey of the FSEP participants as of March 2020 and found that the program appears to meet its stated objective of retaining qualified and talented officers from the URL and IW communities. From the survey responses, more than half of the officers who planned to leave the Navy prior to their FSEP enrollment decided instead to continue their Navy service. Using tuition data and publicly accessible compensation information, the author generated a first estimate of the total cost of the FSEP of approximately $10 million per year when both direct and indirect costs are accounted for. To increase returns from the program, the author recommends targeting the FSEP to officers with 6–7 years of service while also making a concerted effort to utilize the degrees attained from the program., Ensign, United States Navy, Approved for public release. distribution is unlimited

Fostering a high-quality force in the USMC is essential for readiness, efficiency, and cost-minimization. This study seeks to inform the USMC on optimal strategies to reduce attrition and elicit a high-quality force by identifying factors contributing to recruiting higher-quality enlistees. We will use individual-enlistee-level, recruiter-level, and station (RSS)-level aggregated analyses. We first must determine what constitutes quality among enlistees. Our main enlistee-quality measure will be attrition at boot camp and at other intervals in the 1st term. These provide measures of the quality of the match between the enlistee and the Marines. We will also examine more conventional measures of quality (AFQT, education, waivers, PFT, FITREPS). Specifically, our research questions will determine: 1. How does the quality of the recruiter (or recruiters in a station) affect various measures of the quality of the enlistee, such as 1st term attrition? 2. How do other factors affect the quality of enlistees? 3. How does the diversity of recruiters in a recruiting station in minority areas affect the success of the station in attracting high-quality minority recruits? 4. What policy changes should be made to the screening and assignment of canvassing recruiters that lead to higher-quality enlistees, lower 1stterm attrition, and a higher-quality force?

This project supports the Navy’s efforts to promote diversity and inclusion (D&I), which are recognized as strategic imperatives that give the Navy a warfighting advantage against our adversaries. The study utilizes both quantitative and qualitative approaches to understand the major contributing factors to an inclusive and diverse command, accomplishing four research objectives: (1) developing metrics to assess behaviors of inclusion within the fleet; (2) assessing inclusion behaviors within the fleet using the developed metrics; (3) determining the most impactful D&I competencies for building inclusion; and (4) identifying command practices that contribute to greater acceptance of diversity. We develop and introduce a survey instrument to assess Personal Inclusion Factors (individuals’ feelings of being personally included within their command) and Command Core Inclusion Competencies (individuals’ beliefs about how their commands demonstrate practices that promote diversity and inclusion) suitable for a Navy context. The instrument captures best practices and validated metrics for promoting and assessing D&I in organizations and tailors them to the Navy and Sailors’ work. We fielded this survey to 489 active-duty Navy personnel (enlisted and officers) asking them to report on both their current and past commands. We find that females across all race/ethnicities on average report lower feelings of inclusion and rate commands lower on Core Command Inclusion Competencies than their male counterparts. This gender difference is stronger for sea versus shore commands. Participants also answered open-ended questions about the competencies that they believed were most important for promoting D&I in the fleet. "Inclusive leadership" emerged as a dominant theme; in particular, participants felt most included in commands where leadership valued their perspectives and ideas and where Sailors felt heard on a day-in, day-out basis.

In recruiting, the phrase “you recruit who you are” describes a presumed relationship—recruiters attract and enlist individuals who are similar to themselves or within their in-group. This research evaluates the correlation of high-quality recruiters on high-quality enlistees. For the 264,681 recruiter-enlistee pairs from 2011 to 2019, quality is defined and determined for both recruiters and enlistees with five metrics using DOD enlistment standards and Marine Corps promotion and retention standards. I use linear probability models with RSS fixed effects and year fixed effects to hold constant market conditions and variations across years. Based on the five metrics, I find that high-quality recruiters have a consistently positive estimated effect on high-quality enlistees across all metrics with several effects statistically significant. I surmise that, by determining which Marines are high-quality prior to their assignment to recruiting, the Marine Corps may affect the quality of the enlistees at accession. Because force design necessitates higher-quality accessions, this thesis therefore recommends that the Marine Corps consider sending more high-quality Marines to recruiting duty to potentially improve the quality of the warfighting organization. Conversely, if the Marine Corps does not prioritize and send high-quality Marines to recruiting duty, then the Marine Corps may pay the price with lower quality enlistees.

This report contends that most military-manpower research that aims to estimate causal effects suffers from flaws that render the research invalid. I discuss the objectives and ethics of research, and I give a low-math quick guide to the main pitfalls of research, While I do not test the claim that most manpower research is flawed, I show that several relatively prominent examples of manpower research turns out to be invalid, using the pitfalls I describe. This includes some of my own prior research. I end with recommendations on how to improve the research process for the Department of Defense, which includes: requiring training of researchers (beyond what graduate school taught and which could have helped me avoid my research mistakes), having review panels assess a proposed study’s methods before funding is granted, reviewing incentives at research organizations to ensure they promote high-quality research, improving quality control at research organizations, and periodically reviewing the quality of an organization’s research.

Each year the Marine Corps recruits more than 30,000 enlistees. In an effort to obtain high-quality enlistees, over 40 percent of enlistees ship to bootcamp during the June, July, August, and September trimester. In this thesis, I analyze the Marine Corps’ accession plan and the relationship between a Marine's accession trimester and time awaiting training, as well as their likelihood to re-enlist after their first term and the probability of attrition prior to completing their first term. Additionally, this study determines if enlistees from the June, July, August, and September trimester outperform enlistees from the other trimesters. I use linear regression models and graphical trend analysis to estimate the relationships. I find that June, July, August, and September enlistees have the highest mean days awaiting training. Furthermore, the phasing approach increases the time awaiting training days for the following trimester. The increase in time awaiting training appears to be negatively associated with the probability of re-enlistment. Graphical analysis suggests the June, July, August, and September enlistees did not perform better than their counterparts; however, the differences in performance measure are minor. The attrition model shows a modest negative correlation between time awaiting training and likelihood of attrition. Considering high-quality enlistees accumulate the most days, the estimated effect is logical., http://archive.org/details/bootcampaccessio1094567123, Major, United States Marine Corps, Approved for public release. distribution is unlimited